“GREATNESS LACKING.”

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20317, 27 January 1928, Page 7

“GREATNESS LACKING.”

ART AND ARCHITECTURE, AGE OF HUSTLE. Criticism of conditions of life today as being responsible for " the lack of truly great architecture," was passed by Mr Walter Tapper, A.R.A., in his presidential address to the Royal Institute of British Architects, London. Among the factors which Mr Tapper considered to be militating against architectural greatness were absence of the national virtue of dignity and of home life in an age of hustle and excitement, in which the people wer « herded together in Hats; the introduction of machinery and of mass production methods ; and the unwise spending of money. " Men," he declared, " will spend lavishly on motor cars, what they would think impossible to spend on their homes, that makes us realise that men to-day are not thinking in terms of permanency." Nevertheless, Mr Tapper had no fear for the future of his profession. " There is a great deal of jazz architecture," he said, " but there is a greater quantity of good work than was the case some years COUNTRYSIDE VANDALS. The institute, tb e President said, might, in common with various learned societies, be congratulated on it s efforts to preserve Waterloo bridge. The bridge was an architectural adornment of London, but with a curious perverseness, common to human nature, strenuous efforts had been made to destroy it and to preserve that of Charing Cross, a s ugly as Waterloo was beautiful. The spoilation of our countryside was in nowise confined to any one section of the community ; the whole nation was responsible. If any one of them were to draw a brush of whitewash across a picture of Titians' or any great master's work, they should, rightly, be considered mad and probably locked up, and yet vandalism as serious, or more so, was occurring daily over the whole countryside without let or hindrance. VIRTUE OF DIGNITY.

“ It is a matter of congratulation,’’ proceeded Mr Tapper, “ that the public is showing an increasing interest in architecture. This interest is progressing slowly. If modern architecture is to compare favourably with that of past ages, there is much leeway to make up. “ Architecture is a powerful factor for good to the community. Great architecture possesses all the human virtues—dignity, modesty, restraint, and so on. It is impossible to imagine that such can arise unless a nation is strongly possessed of these virtues. The public mind must have these virtues if they are to be expressed in architecture. Take that of dignity. He would be a Isold man to maintain that this to-day was a common virtue, and to my mind it is the mam reason whv so much architecture lacks that quality. In the greatest days of architecture there was a deep-rooted sense of style. The principles underlying these forms were accepted by all, with the traditions connected therewith. These escaped us at the end of the eighteenth century, and they have not been wholly recaptured. The difficulties which beset art to-day I believe, arise largely because of this. Architects must make up their minds that if architecture is to play the important part it should in the life of a nation, these traditions must be recovered, so that we are all working with the same aims and to the same end. “ Apart from loss of training and traditional feeling from which we are undoubtedly suffering, there are many other reasons for the lack of really great architecture to-day—the incentive for ownership, for instance. When our forefathers owned the land they built a home not only for themselves but for their children and their children’s children; anti so we obtained these lovely old houses which are still to be seen. The times in which we live are so complex that it is difficult to get at the root of the difficulties and to overcome them. For instance, the herding together of the people in large towns, and, when there, their herding together in blocks of flats, all tend to take away the real sense of home life and its responsibilities. It does not mean living in the best sens.e, nor can it have the effect of a real hjme, and it helps to create the hustle and excitement of the present age, which must inilitate against good architecture, since it inevitably eliminates time for thought and quiet MECH ANICALISING THE MIND. “ The introduction of machinery was, no doubt, another reason for the absence of great architecture. Mass production could never produce the best. The predominance of mechanical labour must tend to mechanicalise men’s minds, to make them dull, and so less receptive of the fine subtleties of any art, were it architecture, painting, music, literature, or any other. Nor could people be expected to take an intelligent interest in matters conducive to their welfare, so long as they perforce had to live in mean and squalid houses or in uninteresting flats. It was difficult to see how these matters could be remedied, but they lay at the root of the mischief, and until they were remedied it was futile to expect really great architecture.

“ The greatness of a nation,” observed the president, “ia not to be assessed solely in terms of money, though of course, that is not to be ignored, but rather on what that nation produces. The greatness of the Roman Empire was not expressed solely by its military achievements, but also by its architectural triumphs. It would be difficult to imagine that the men who designed and erected the noble buildings we all admire were petty or mean. Men with great ideals are often subjects for mirth. We are told it is the practical utilitarian who is wanted. Of course, he is needed, but history tells us in unmistakable terms that it is the idealist that we need first of all.

“ We are informed in these days that great architecture cannot be afforded; it certainly seems to be so, but I venture to think only because money is being spent unwisely. So far as one observes, it is being spent on things which are fleeting. Men will spend lavishly m motor cars what they would think impossible to spend on their homes. That makes us realise that the minds of men to-day are not thinking in terms of permanency.

“ The system of building to-day is one which it is impossible to imagine can lead to great architecture. The system, I believe, comes from America. As an organisation it is splendid. On big contracts it is arranged at the very beginning that every trade begins and finishes at a specified date and specified hour. The bricklayer, say, finishes at 11.30, and the plasterer begins his work at 11.35, and so on. It seems to be a sound method, if the governing factor is to be time and not architecture. How fearfully uninteresting this system must be to the workmen. Ho, it would appear, is just part of a machine. Design and execution cannot be divorced, and it is only by arousing in the workman a love of bis work, and by giving him a persona] interest in it. apart from money, that you will get things worth having.